The Decline of Progressive Politics
By Sam Onimisi
How time changes. Once upon a time there was a clear demarcation between Progressives and the Conservatives in the practice of politics, but not any more. Today, the divide between the two is too slim to notice unless one uses the microscope, so to say. You probably know the reason or causes of this development, as I also can hazard some guesses, though none of us may be credited with the gift of clairvoyance as we are talking after the fact. Beyond rhetoric, today’s progressive is as bland as the conservative. Even at this, there is no coherence and confidence in his speech any more. The last time they appeared on the podium, they looked as ghostly as ghoul and succeeded only in opening many mouths aghast, which is a pity.
The fact that progressives are now famished is due to no fault of theirs. They are made so by the forces they have used up their energy to fight – the powers that – be. Having been hunted with hunger and shackled by lack of opportunity (or is it lack of acceptance) their number have dwindled to the extent that they can now be counted on the finger tips. In any case, what is progressive politics? The politics of progressives is hinged on social welfare social justice and social integration. It entails freedom for the individual as well as autonomy of the units. It is futuristic in vision, plans and in dreams and worldview – a politics that employs pragmatism to effect needed change, using evolutionary approach as a first choice and at the same time, courageous enough to adopt a revolutionary approach if the need be. In Africa, Chief Obafemi Awolowo of Nigeria, Julius Nyerere of Tanzania and Kwame Nkruma of Ghana, to mention a few are some of the progressive politicians of our time.
Either for lack of depth, or of courage and vision, the generation of progressive politicians of today are engaged only in protest politics. They protest against public policies perceived to be against the long-term interest of the people, but lack the nerve to carry the protest to its logical conclusion by making or forcing government to reverse such policies. Many have become oppositional politicians. Associated with protests and morally persuaded enough not to join the fray, they remain in the opposition for the wrong or the right reasons. You could regard this as a compromised version of progressive politics, since they lack the valve and the wherewithal to transform beyond rhetoric into practical action that benefits anyone.
Exhausted of resources with which to continue to sell their ideas, deprived by the conservative system of winners – take – all, not wanting to die yet nor willing to join them since he cannot beat them, it becomes a matter of time for progressive politicians to adopt a compromise or resign from politics entirely. But like a deadly virus, politics has a way of cleaving to those who have engaged in it for long such that you cannot leave it even when you want. And so, you are inexorably forced to continue to agitate for reforms on empty stomach. That this specie of politicians is still alive is a wonder, their ghostly looks being a memento mori of sorts.
In the first and second Republic politics of Nigeria, many opposition politicians were honored with appointments by their parties in the regions or states where they held sway. This was true of the UPN and the NPP led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe respectively. Today, if you are unfortunate not to win (or deliver your constituency) you are automatically sentenced to death by hunger. Not that you could not fend for yourself if left alone or without politics, but for the fact that your efforts are more often thwarted or subverted by the winners – who are determined to take all from you, or strip you naked for being so unlucky as to loose. Aren’t you amazed that some of these progressives are still alive?
Here then is the birth of political contractors whose stock-in-trade is political jobbery. Men and women who are otherwise respectable but who are forced by the zest for life and survival to engage in middlemen’s trade. Many are into many parties at the same time. All they need do is to belong to one party in the morning and a different one at night. They are forced into political demagoguery by godfathers whose trade mark is monopoly. Gluttons who are recycled so much that they die in office long after they have fixed their own children in public offices as their successors. If you don’t see why progressive politics is in decline in Nigeria, then you may continue to believe the wrong people instead of some godforsaken godfathers. In other climes, godfathers foster younger politicians to take after them, but here it have to be their own offspring.
Who do we blame for this state of affairs? People are swift to answer the question by blaming it on poverty. The next question is: which type of poverty? I will say that it is both poverty of ideas, as well as poverty of material resources. Come to think of it, a man of ideas should have no business with poverty – all things being equal; but because most things are not equal in Nigeria, you are sentenced to long-term imprisonment by poverty. After all, the best of practical ideas needs wings to fly, i.e. money. Without it, you could go on and on with fanciful ideas that will never see the light of day. And all you have to show for your brilliant ideas is an elongated neck and a pitiful look; in addition, those you fought so hard for would turn round to blame you for their own poverty as if you are its accredited distributor.
Meanwhile, the conservative politicians whose ingenuity is greed (with capital G) are so robust they are threatening to burst. If they don’t look so in the body, their bank accounts are bursting at the seems. If the Ayattolah of Amala politics and garrison commander of Ibadan politics were to be alive, his Senator-son would now have been assured of the gubernatorial ticket for next year’s governorship race of Oyo State. How his orphan will run the race without his larger-than-life father is anybody’s guess. His next door neighbor in Kwara State, who probably invented the Amala brand of politics, Dr. Abubakar Olusola Saraki makes no pretension on the success he has made of political monopoly. The Second Republic Senate Leader has successfully built a dynasty which Kwarans may need to do a hard wrestle to dismantle. He and his family has monopolized the Kwara central senatorial seat since 1999 with Senator Gbemisola Saraki, his daughter.
Since 2003, his son and Gbemisola’s brother Dr. Bukola Saraki has been the governor of Kwara State, a known presidential aspirant in the 2011 race. A weird and macabre scenario is currently unfolding in the state. Some apparently demented women are said to have threatened to go nude if Gbemisola is not allowed to take over from her brother in 2011. Since Kwarans are already stripped naked politically after being raped economically, I guess it will not be a rude spectacle if the blokes also joined the planned road show of nudity. I bet that the Chief Priest himself will be highly entertained by the kind gesture of the nudists. In the context of monopoly as enjoyed by the Saraki clan, all talks of progressive politics is not just a day dream but idle chatter. And so, opposition parties and politicians cannot be expected to pull off some hat-trick in the face of the vice-grip on power and coercive agencies of government by one family.
The recycling of ex-presidents and the rigging of elections by parties in government so as to exclude opposition parties does not help to promote progressive politics or multi-party democracy. As a matter of fact, a recent amendment to the constitution which allows elected officials to change from one party to the other during their tenure is bound to make politics not only murkier and dirtier, it threatens to eclipse the remnants of whatever looks or sounds like progressive in political practice. How this will enhance democracy is as nebulous as the nebula.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
CELEBRATING THE PROFANE: NIGERIA @50
CELEBRATING THE PROFANE: NIGERIA @50
By Sam Onimisi
Grace is defined as unmerited favour given to man by God for his regeneration or sanctification. If it is an unsolicited gift as it were, then man does not deserve credit for it and so, all thanks and gratitude belongs to the source of it – God. However, when man attempt to appropriate honour to himself as if he were the source of grace, then it becomes disgusting and repugnant to good conscience.
One thing Nigerian leaders take pride for is the potentialities of the country: the varied and numerous mineral and economic resources which are yet untapped, the geographical size of our land mass and the acclaimed numerical strength which is reputed to be the largest in Africa. Potentials! None of these potentials are created by our leaders for which they take pride or credit and they have not shown gratitude to God who deposited these resources on our soil, who allowed us to be so big or large and made it possible for us to increase in number. By gratitude, I don’t mean religiosity, pompous piety or market square holiness which we display in super abundance. I mean the fear of God and the love for godly values, which is as short in supply as to make it almost non-existent.
P-o-t-e-n-t-i-a-l-s! How much of them have we developed or tapped? The petroleum resource which we concentrated on, how have we developed it with value added subsidiary industries? Why are we still flaring away the by-product of gas? Why are we still importing refined oil 52 years after exploration began? Why did we keep exporting oil in crude form after half century experience or involvement in petroleum exploration? We can go on with more reasonable questions ad infinitum; but what then is the pride displayed by our leaders for? May be for potentials only! The waste, thievery and pilferage of our petroleum revenue income by those mandated to manage them bleed the country of its greatness, making her a naked giant!
With a population of about 150 million, we are no doubt a giant in Africa. But how many of these are literate? How many goes to bed with food in the stomach? How many has roofs over their heads? How many are employed, whether partial or full employment? Do we really know how many we are? Why do we export our girls to Europe and Arabia for prostitution, and our boys for forced labour? Why are Nigerians such a menace everywhere they are in Asia, Arabia, America, Africa and Europe? Why has 419 scammers and fraudsters become our exports? How many of them are in the National Assembly, in the Judiciary and in the Executive? Do we have a means of knowing, of detecting them and of flushing them out of the system? Where then is our pride as a people?
In Africa, Zaire, Algeria and Sudan are larger than Nigeria in land mass, although we are more populous than them. So, if there is any pride in land mass, these countries takes precedence over us. Zaire is in shambles with civil strives and threats of rebellion. Algeria explodes intermittently in sectarian strife and Sudan is rankled with religious, racial and ethnic rancor. Which of these ills is not a threat to Nigeria? We may not have reached the Rubicon of war or disintegration as these countries, but are we not inching towards it by our leaders’ inaction and hypocrisy? And so, what is in our size and how have we exploited it to good advantage or benefits for which we could take pride? Is it our borders, which is reputed to be among the most porous in the world? Or our Immigration Service known to be ranking as the most compromised? Or the Custom and Excise that promotes smuggling and worship smugglers who impregnates them with bribery?
Potentials, unexploited potential and the abuse of what is a gift is not only unethical, unprofitable and sinful, it is a celebration of profanity for which no man or nation is commended but condemned.
See how we have abused the iron and steel minerals God gave us and how we have stolen Ajaokuta and Itakpe blind. See how we have despoiled the Niger Delta for the oil God gave us. The tin mined in Jos has left the town with gullies, valleys and unusable landscape. We probably have more fertile land than those countries which are larger than us, yet our agricultural development is not enough to feed us as we import not less than 40% of the food we take. P-o-t-e-n-t-i-a-l-s.
Nigeria has produced renowned economists, eminent jurists, gifted engineers and scientists, erudite scholars, celebrated surgeons, pharmacists and other medical and Para-medical professionals. What of our famous mathematicians, political geniuses, acclaimed administrators and other equally important professionals? But of what use are they to us today? To what use or purpose have we deployed them? Why are they attracted to work for other countries but their own? What incentives do we grant them to reproduce their kind for us? Why do we wait for their demise before we celebrate and honour them? What is the use or value of honour in the grave? Professors Chike Obi, Ayodele Awojobi, Dr. Tai Solarin, and many others whose ingenuity, inventiveness and productive creativity are enough to uplift any country are celebrated by default or at death. Here is a country that kills her best, celebrates her mediocre and worship at the altar of her pen and armed robbers!
In Nigeria, a thief at the Public works Department qualifies to be a robbery baron at the Port Harbours. There, giant ocean liners could disappear without trace, as they are in the care of master fixers. We probably have more private universities today than public ones and they are owned by those who had charge and responsibility for the upkeep and maintenance of our public citadel of learning but left them high and dry. Go and see their own universities, they are by far superior to our own as centres of excellence! Using Paul to rob Peter and robbing Paul together with what he stole from Peter is greatness. Is that greatness, I ask? It is greatness, is that your answer? Questions without answers are answers without questions. If I must conclude, here it is.
Potentials serve no useful purpose unless and until they are developed into actuality. Wealth without productivity is poverty in disguise. Stolen wealth has wings; they will surely fly away with time. To celebrate unearned wealth is not only profane; it deprives the individual and the people of true greatness and riches. Here is a poser, if you don’t mind. Between the first and the second National Anthem, which one has the potential (oh God, this word again!) to inspire a people to unity and productivity? Remember, potentials bereft of productivity are profanities!
By Sam Onimisi
Grace is defined as unmerited favour given to man by God for his regeneration or sanctification. If it is an unsolicited gift as it were, then man does not deserve credit for it and so, all thanks and gratitude belongs to the source of it – God. However, when man attempt to appropriate honour to himself as if he were the source of grace, then it becomes disgusting and repugnant to good conscience.
One thing Nigerian leaders take pride for is the potentialities of the country: the varied and numerous mineral and economic resources which are yet untapped, the geographical size of our land mass and the acclaimed numerical strength which is reputed to be the largest in Africa. Potentials! None of these potentials are created by our leaders for which they take pride or credit and they have not shown gratitude to God who deposited these resources on our soil, who allowed us to be so big or large and made it possible for us to increase in number. By gratitude, I don’t mean religiosity, pompous piety or market square holiness which we display in super abundance. I mean the fear of God and the love for godly values, which is as short in supply as to make it almost non-existent.
P-o-t-e-n-t-i-a-l-s! How much of them have we developed or tapped? The petroleum resource which we concentrated on, how have we developed it with value added subsidiary industries? Why are we still flaring away the by-product of gas? Why are we still importing refined oil 52 years after exploration began? Why did we keep exporting oil in crude form after half century experience or involvement in petroleum exploration? We can go on with more reasonable questions ad infinitum; but what then is the pride displayed by our leaders for? May be for potentials only! The waste, thievery and pilferage of our petroleum revenue income by those mandated to manage them bleed the country of its greatness, making her a naked giant!
With a population of about 150 million, we are no doubt a giant in Africa. But how many of these are literate? How many goes to bed with food in the stomach? How many has roofs over their heads? How many are employed, whether partial or full employment? Do we really know how many we are? Why do we export our girls to Europe and Arabia for prostitution, and our boys for forced labour? Why are Nigerians such a menace everywhere they are in Asia, Arabia, America, Africa and Europe? Why has 419 scammers and fraudsters become our exports? How many of them are in the National Assembly, in the Judiciary and in the Executive? Do we have a means of knowing, of detecting them and of flushing them out of the system? Where then is our pride as a people?
In Africa, Zaire, Algeria and Sudan are larger than Nigeria in land mass, although we are more populous than them. So, if there is any pride in land mass, these countries takes precedence over us. Zaire is in shambles with civil strives and threats of rebellion. Algeria explodes intermittently in sectarian strife and Sudan is rankled with religious, racial and ethnic rancor. Which of these ills is not a threat to Nigeria? We may not have reached the Rubicon of war or disintegration as these countries, but are we not inching towards it by our leaders’ inaction and hypocrisy? And so, what is in our size and how have we exploited it to good advantage or benefits for which we could take pride? Is it our borders, which is reputed to be among the most porous in the world? Or our Immigration Service known to be ranking as the most compromised? Or the Custom and Excise that promotes smuggling and worship smugglers who impregnates them with bribery?
Potentials, unexploited potential and the abuse of what is a gift is not only unethical, unprofitable and sinful, it is a celebration of profanity for which no man or nation is commended but condemned.
See how we have abused the iron and steel minerals God gave us and how we have stolen Ajaokuta and Itakpe blind. See how we have despoiled the Niger Delta for the oil God gave us. The tin mined in Jos has left the town with gullies, valleys and unusable landscape. We probably have more fertile land than those countries which are larger than us, yet our agricultural development is not enough to feed us as we import not less than 40% of the food we take. P-o-t-e-n-t-i-a-l-s.
Nigeria has produced renowned economists, eminent jurists, gifted engineers and scientists, erudite scholars, celebrated surgeons, pharmacists and other medical and Para-medical professionals. What of our famous mathematicians, political geniuses, acclaimed administrators and other equally important professionals? But of what use are they to us today? To what use or purpose have we deployed them? Why are they attracted to work for other countries but their own? What incentives do we grant them to reproduce their kind for us? Why do we wait for their demise before we celebrate and honour them? What is the use or value of honour in the grave? Professors Chike Obi, Ayodele Awojobi, Dr. Tai Solarin, and many others whose ingenuity, inventiveness and productive creativity are enough to uplift any country are celebrated by default or at death. Here is a country that kills her best, celebrates her mediocre and worship at the altar of her pen and armed robbers!
In Nigeria, a thief at the Public works Department qualifies to be a robbery baron at the Port Harbours. There, giant ocean liners could disappear without trace, as they are in the care of master fixers. We probably have more private universities today than public ones and they are owned by those who had charge and responsibility for the upkeep and maintenance of our public citadel of learning but left them high and dry. Go and see their own universities, they are by far superior to our own as centres of excellence! Using Paul to rob Peter and robbing Paul together with what he stole from Peter is greatness. Is that greatness, I ask? It is greatness, is that your answer? Questions without answers are answers without questions. If I must conclude, here it is.
Potentials serve no useful purpose unless and until they are developed into actuality. Wealth without productivity is poverty in disguise. Stolen wealth has wings; they will surely fly away with time. To celebrate unearned wealth is not only profane; it deprives the individual and the people of true greatness and riches. Here is a poser, if you don’t mind. Between the first and the second National Anthem, which one has the potential (oh God, this word again!) to inspire a people to unity and productivity? Remember, potentials bereft of productivity are profanities!
NIGERIA: A TODDLER @ 50 ?
NIGERIA: A TODDLER @ 50 ?
By Sam Onimisi
The temptation to write on Nigeria at 50 has been so great that I couldn’t contain it any more. I contemplated the possibility of a miracle happening between now and the next six weeks and failed to see anything, safe for supernatural intervention. Even on this score, I tried some esoteric gambit so as to get a glimpse of, even if a little exoteric proof of some luck for Nigeria – something which can be said to be extraordinarily positive, the divine stars failed to deliver also. Mind you, I had tried prayers, fasting and meditation to see if an angel will have mercy and reveal to me what lies in the womb of the next six weeks, I was only left on the shores between migraine and hallucination. Not wanting to pass out before my time, I called off the search.
Nigeria got her name courtesy of the mistress of Lord Fredrick John Dealtry Lugard, the British soldier and colonial administrator who was governor-general of Nigeria between 1914 and 1919. He it was who, through the Royal Niger Company subdued the various kingdoms and chiefdoms, forced them together for what is known now as Nigeria. Throughout colonial rule, i.e. from 1900 to 1960, almost all British administrators, whether as residents, district officers or governors were military officers. Any wonder then that the military have monopolized governance even after independence; to the extent that civil rule or democracy is nearly an anathema to us.
One could say that we were at peace (or were forced to) when the colonialists were in charge; as aliens whatever they stole were repatriated home to U.K. Thus, one hardly sees any house or property acquired by them while here. Since Independence in 1960, our differences began to surge forward and our leaders appeared not to have any clue as to what to do. Those in charge were too proud to take advice from those who had some ideas and offered them ex-gratis. As a result, major tribes took up themselves through the government they controlled.
First, there was the Tiv riot which was brutally put down by the Sardauna of Sokoto. That event gave birth to the Police unit variously known or called today as ‘Kill and go’, ‘Riot Police’, Mobile Police or Mopol etc.
Then the meddlesomeness of Balewa’s Federal Government, in the regional affairs of the West, resulting in the controversial treasonable felony trials, conviction and jailing of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and his political associates in 1962. What followed was known as “operation we tie,” during which collaborators and traitors (so they were called) were targets of arson and mayhem. The rest of us thought it was no business of ours, as it was ‘they’ and not ‘us’; until Major Kaduna Nzeogwu thought otherwise through a coup detat in January 1966.
Just before then or around the same time, Isaac Adaka Boro got angry enough to want to take the Niger Delta from Nigeria for the same reason that eventually took more tolls, including Ken Saro Wiwa and many others. All this militarized the people and metamorphosed into the recent Niger-Delta war, although we refused to call it a war, yet we offer the warriors of Niger Delta amnesty and are currently being rehabilitated. We couldn’t manage Major Nzeogwu and his boys and so one pogrom leading to another came to a head in 1967 and Biafra happened, then a three year civil war which ended in 1970. Between then and now, there have been hundreds of ethno-religious riots mostly in the old North whose death toll may be more than that of the Civil war. Who cares to count? But what are those things we ought to have done but failed to do? Let’s go on retrospective excursion.
First, after the departure of the British, we ought to have summoned all Native Authorities representing ethnic nationalities to an Independent National Conference (INC) to discuss debate, bargain and agree to a set of terms of our co-habitation as a nation-state under the supervision of the United Nations. This is because whatever the pre-independence London Conferences discussed, participants could not have freely expressed their opinion as we were still under British bondage; what with their bias and preference for one side or the other.
Second, the INC ought to have changed the name of the country to reflect the physical features or landmark of the land. If it must be connected with inland water-ways, we had and still have River Niger and Benue, and could have changed name to NIBENA and by today, we could have been NIBENIS.
Third, it was easier at Independence especially during the INC to have adopted a native language as Lingua Franca and English would have become a second or third language of NIBENIS. By now, all citizens of 50 years of age or below would have been able to read, write and speak the language- a development that would have united us and helped make us into a true nation.
Four, the INC could have granted or admitted more regions based on territorial contiguity, ethno-linguistic and Socio-cultural affinity. These regions may not have been up to 30, but could have been more homogeneous and internally autonomous, big or resourceful to be economically self-supporting, politically important and willing to co-habit in an inter-dependent and reciprocal relations with other regions. Agitation for state creation, resource control and complaints of domination and ethno-religious riots would have been reduced to the barest minimum for peace to reign.
Five, there should have been a conscious and deliberately distancing or disconnection from Britain in order to wade off undue influence and so, debrief ourselves of colonial mentality and servility. This could have reinforced our freedom and liberty to pursue policies independent of Britain who naturally loathe our self-assertion. Six, we should have made agriculture and associated occupation such as fisheries, cattle herding and poultry as the main industry from which industrialization could have evolved, naturally. The much talk about food security and export income would have been attained, making oil and other solid minerals additional sources of revenue.
Seven, even if the 1967-1970 civil war was inevitable, we could have adopted the Biafran engineers and technologists and induct them into a national scientific and technological agency to train other Nigerians, develop and fabricate basic technological tools, instruments and machines for a sustainable technological development and industrial growth. This would have reduced our total dependence on foreign technology to a tolerable minimum. We squandered this opportunity for reasons, which is utterly absurd and altogether silly.
Ghana was known as Gold Coast, Ivory Coast is now Cote De’voure, Dahomey is now called Benin, Zaire was Congo-Kinshasha, Zimbabwe was Rhodesia, and Upper Volta is now called Burkina Faso. They all changed name for the salutary and Psychological effects on their countries after the trauma of colonial bondage. In Africa, children are named by their fathers, although mothers do give names too but those are mostly second or subsidiary names. Nigeria is saddled with a name given by someone’s concubine and no one has attempted a change, isn’t this a shame?
An average person at 50 is either a grandfather or grandmother or is aspiring to be. A country at 50 is expected to have resolved basic issues which are tormenting us today. That we cannot conduct a clean local government election, much less a general election is a collective shame. If all we achieved in 50years is that we have managed to remain one, it is not a guarantee that we shall forever remain so. I don’t want to say so nor am I happy in saying it but if any foreigner calls Nigeria a toddler at 50, I will not be angry. After all, what is there to cheer about? If you are big for nothing, you are the smallest of all men!
By Sam Onimisi
The temptation to write on Nigeria at 50 has been so great that I couldn’t contain it any more. I contemplated the possibility of a miracle happening between now and the next six weeks and failed to see anything, safe for supernatural intervention. Even on this score, I tried some esoteric gambit so as to get a glimpse of, even if a little exoteric proof of some luck for Nigeria – something which can be said to be extraordinarily positive, the divine stars failed to deliver also. Mind you, I had tried prayers, fasting and meditation to see if an angel will have mercy and reveal to me what lies in the womb of the next six weeks, I was only left on the shores between migraine and hallucination. Not wanting to pass out before my time, I called off the search.
Nigeria got her name courtesy of the mistress of Lord Fredrick John Dealtry Lugard, the British soldier and colonial administrator who was governor-general of Nigeria between 1914 and 1919. He it was who, through the Royal Niger Company subdued the various kingdoms and chiefdoms, forced them together for what is known now as Nigeria. Throughout colonial rule, i.e. from 1900 to 1960, almost all British administrators, whether as residents, district officers or governors were military officers. Any wonder then that the military have monopolized governance even after independence; to the extent that civil rule or democracy is nearly an anathema to us.
One could say that we were at peace (or were forced to) when the colonialists were in charge; as aliens whatever they stole were repatriated home to U.K. Thus, one hardly sees any house or property acquired by them while here. Since Independence in 1960, our differences began to surge forward and our leaders appeared not to have any clue as to what to do. Those in charge were too proud to take advice from those who had some ideas and offered them ex-gratis. As a result, major tribes took up themselves through the government they controlled.
First, there was the Tiv riot which was brutally put down by the Sardauna of Sokoto. That event gave birth to the Police unit variously known or called today as ‘Kill and go’, ‘Riot Police’, Mobile Police or Mopol etc.
Then the meddlesomeness of Balewa’s Federal Government, in the regional affairs of the West, resulting in the controversial treasonable felony trials, conviction and jailing of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and his political associates in 1962. What followed was known as “operation we tie,” during which collaborators and traitors (so they were called) were targets of arson and mayhem. The rest of us thought it was no business of ours, as it was ‘they’ and not ‘us’; until Major Kaduna Nzeogwu thought otherwise through a coup detat in January 1966.
Just before then or around the same time, Isaac Adaka Boro got angry enough to want to take the Niger Delta from Nigeria for the same reason that eventually took more tolls, including Ken Saro Wiwa and many others. All this militarized the people and metamorphosed into the recent Niger-Delta war, although we refused to call it a war, yet we offer the warriors of Niger Delta amnesty and are currently being rehabilitated. We couldn’t manage Major Nzeogwu and his boys and so one pogrom leading to another came to a head in 1967 and Biafra happened, then a three year civil war which ended in 1970. Between then and now, there have been hundreds of ethno-religious riots mostly in the old North whose death toll may be more than that of the Civil war. Who cares to count? But what are those things we ought to have done but failed to do? Let’s go on retrospective excursion.
First, after the departure of the British, we ought to have summoned all Native Authorities representing ethnic nationalities to an Independent National Conference (INC) to discuss debate, bargain and agree to a set of terms of our co-habitation as a nation-state under the supervision of the United Nations. This is because whatever the pre-independence London Conferences discussed, participants could not have freely expressed their opinion as we were still under British bondage; what with their bias and preference for one side or the other.
Second, the INC ought to have changed the name of the country to reflect the physical features or landmark of the land. If it must be connected with inland water-ways, we had and still have River Niger and Benue, and could have changed name to NIBENA and by today, we could have been NIBENIS.
Third, it was easier at Independence especially during the INC to have adopted a native language as Lingua Franca and English would have become a second or third language of NIBENIS. By now, all citizens of 50 years of age or below would have been able to read, write and speak the language- a development that would have united us and helped make us into a true nation.
Four, the INC could have granted or admitted more regions based on territorial contiguity, ethno-linguistic and Socio-cultural affinity. These regions may not have been up to 30, but could have been more homogeneous and internally autonomous, big or resourceful to be economically self-supporting, politically important and willing to co-habit in an inter-dependent and reciprocal relations with other regions. Agitation for state creation, resource control and complaints of domination and ethno-religious riots would have been reduced to the barest minimum for peace to reign.
Five, there should have been a conscious and deliberately distancing or disconnection from Britain in order to wade off undue influence and so, debrief ourselves of colonial mentality and servility. This could have reinforced our freedom and liberty to pursue policies independent of Britain who naturally loathe our self-assertion. Six, we should have made agriculture and associated occupation such as fisheries, cattle herding and poultry as the main industry from which industrialization could have evolved, naturally. The much talk about food security and export income would have been attained, making oil and other solid minerals additional sources of revenue.
Seven, even if the 1967-1970 civil war was inevitable, we could have adopted the Biafran engineers and technologists and induct them into a national scientific and technological agency to train other Nigerians, develop and fabricate basic technological tools, instruments and machines for a sustainable technological development and industrial growth. This would have reduced our total dependence on foreign technology to a tolerable minimum. We squandered this opportunity for reasons, which is utterly absurd and altogether silly.
Ghana was known as Gold Coast, Ivory Coast is now Cote De’voure, Dahomey is now called Benin, Zaire was Congo-Kinshasha, Zimbabwe was Rhodesia, and Upper Volta is now called Burkina Faso. They all changed name for the salutary and Psychological effects on their countries after the trauma of colonial bondage. In Africa, children are named by their fathers, although mothers do give names too but those are mostly second or subsidiary names. Nigeria is saddled with a name given by someone’s concubine and no one has attempted a change, isn’t this a shame?
An average person at 50 is either a grandfather or grandmother or is aspiring to be. A country at 50 is expected to have resolved basic issues which are tormenting us today. That we cannot conduct a clean local government election, much less a general election is a collective shame. If all we achieved in 50years is that we have managed to remain one, it is not a guarantee that we shall forever remain so. I don’t want to say so nor am I happy in saying it but if any foreigner calls Nigeria a toddler at 50, I will not be angry. After all, what is there to cheer about? If you are big for nothing, you are the smallest of all men!
THE IRONIES OF NECESSITY
THE IRONIES OF NECESSITY
By Sam Onimisi
“Politics is … a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.” - Ambrose Bierce. Given the experience of the average Nigerian at the hand of politicians, no description of politics could be more apt than that of Ambrose Bierce. Nations have gone to war against nations on the pretext of national interest and integrity even when the issue at disagreement was personal interest of their leaders. You may now wonder if the Nigerian civil war was not fought for the preservation of sectional interest rather than collective concern. After all, it was not absolutely necessary to have fought that war if leaders on both sides exercised restraints, and if they had not allowed their individual ego to come in between their altercations.
Leadership is a necessity just as politics is inescapable; therefore the consent of the ruled is also a necessity if leadership is to be a delight and not a nightmare. Which is why democracy is so far the best way of obtaining the consent of the people if leadership is to be legitimate? But many politicians hide under the doctrine of necessity to commit heinous crime in violation either of the constitution or of convention. They do so under the legal maxim, necessitas non habet legem: necessity knows no law. In Nigeria, our leaders often contrive crises so as to avoid adherence to the constitution for political expediency.
When national leaders circumvent the law in order to secure undue advantage for themselves, they sell the dummy of national interest, national security or national unity, but in most cases, these are mere excuses or subterfuge for group, sectional or sectarian interests. For our entire pretense at democracy, no fundamental national question has been subjected to referendum or plebiscite by any indigenous government since independence in 1960. And yet, we have had to wobble through several panels of inquiry to formulate constitutions – a body which has no means of knowing the choice of the people. No state was created on the basis of the wishes of the majority: they were all created through panels that could not take the votes or obtain the consent of the people for which they were created.
Any wonder that most of the states are troublous with antagonistic ethnic and religious mix? It is said that necessity is the mother of invention. Not in Nigeria; here necessity is an excuse or reason for escape, or the indefinite postponement of needed action until doomsday. Then we reach out for the doctrine of necessity which negates the prevailing law of the land. When late President Umar Yar’ Adua was sick and left for a hospital in Saudi Arabia without handing over the affairs of state to his Vice President, didn’t he violate a law? When he was too sick and could not shoulder the affairs of State, shouldn’t he have resigned? And since he couldn’t or didn’t do so, should he not have been impeached by the National Assembly according to the law?
A cabal whose selfish interest was openly demonstrated was allowed to hold the country to ransom for six long months only for us to fall on the lap of the gods of necessity to move on, despising the constitution. We could concede to an individual the luxury of infringing our laws in order to preserve his own honor, but could not summon the courage to invent changes by reason of our peculiar challenges. Invention is the child of necessity just as necessity is the mother of invention.
The issues at dispute which caused the Nigerian civil war remain largely unresolved, 40 years after the war. If it was a necessity to keep Nigeria one, where is the invention to resolve the issues at dispute? In 1979, there was a disputed election which none of the contestants won decisively accordingly to the electoral law. Yet the powers that be decided the case via a judicial ruling of the Supreme Court which cannot be sited as precedence today. Could we not have rejected that verdict and insisted on the right thing, even if we have to pay the price? The authors of the 122/3 mathematical fraud of 1979 remained in the saddle up till now, to our shame as a people.
In 1993, another general election was held. There was little or no complain of the process except that when the result became apparent – reflecting the wishes of the electorate – the entire election was annulled by the same government which supervised it. In its place, a ramshackle interim government of selected people was put in place. Shouldn’t we have insisted on having our elected representatives instead of a ragtag gang? Yet we moved on, oblivious of the injury inflicted on us all. The same man who annulled that election which he himself supervised now wants to rule us again through an election – what an irony!
When in 1999, the military was conducting a general elections, no one knew the contents of the constitution or the laws by which the country will be administered. Yet, those who wanted to succeed them blindly jumped into the fray without asking questions and today, we are entangled with a constitution most unsuitable for our needs, which amendments by the National Assembly will worsen the value or its usefulness. If we had insisted on having a constitution made by ourselves for ourselves and approved through a referendum, we would have been better off than we are today. But the necessity to get the military out of government and the ambition of some politicians to take over power made us to accept a constitution unknown to us, thereby missing the opportunity.
Rather than adhering to the constitution which granted every one the right to run for any elective office, a doctrine of convenience called power-rotation or zoning is now set to tear us apart again. Rotation or zoning is a sister of the doctrine of necessity, putting the law aside as if it is of no effect. The sum total of this could be summarized thus: Nigerians seems to want to remain united as one country but lacked the courage to embark on a restructuring befitting a multi-ethnic and plural entity which we are. Perhaps we need be reminded of another legal maxim, nuptias non concubitus sed consensus fait, meaning – it is consent, not cohabitation, which makes a marriage. A man and a woman may live under the same roof, sleeping on the same bed, known by others to be husband and wife and yet, are the worst of enemies. Is separation or divorce not a better option if agreement is impossible?
Before you accuse me of treasonable felony, ask yourself why your country is regressing rather than progressing. Ask yourself why smaller countries like Botswana, Ghana and South Africa are now more respected than Nigeria. One more question; ask yourself why we could not conduct an acceptable election since 1960. Is it not for the same reason or factor why we have not evolved to be a nation in the true sense of the world? And why your ethnic nationality provides more sense of belonging than Nigeria? After all, you don’t have to be told that domus sua cuique est tutissimus refugium, i.e. to every one his house is his surest refuge.
By Sam Onimisi
“Politics is … a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.” - Ambrose Bierce. Given the experience of the average Nigerian at the hand of politicians, no description of politics could be more apt than that of Ambrose Bierce. Nations have gone to war against nations on the pretext of national interest and integrity even when the issue at disagreement was personal interest of their leaders. You may now wonder if the Nigerian civil war was not fought for the preservation of sectional interest rather than collective concern. After all, it was not absolutely necessary to have fought that war if leaders on both sides exercised restraints, and if they had not allowed their individual ego to come in between their altercations.
Leadership is a necessity just as politics is inescapable; therefore the consent of the ruled is also a necessity if leadership is to be a delight and not a nightmare. Which is why democracy is so far the best way of obtaining the consent of the people if leadership is to be legitimate? But many politicians hide under the doctrine of necessity to commit heinous crime in violation either of the constitution or of convention. They do so under the legal maxim, necessitas non habet legem: necessity knows no law. In Nigeria, our leaders often contrive crises so as to avoid adherence to the constitution for political expediency.
When national leaders circumvent the law in order to secure undue advantage for themselves, they sell the dummy of national interest, national security or national unity, but in most cases, these are mere excuses or subterfuge for group, sectional or sectarian interests. For our entire pretense at democracy, no fundamental national question has been subjected to referendum or plebiscite by any indigenous government since independence in 1960. And yet, we have had to wobble through several panels of inquiry to formulate constitutions – a body which has no means of knowing the choice of the people. No state was created on the basis of the wishes of the majority: they were all created through panels that could not take the votes or obtain the consent of the people for which they were created.
Any wonder that most of the states are troublous with antagonistic ethnic and religious mix? It is said that necessity is the mother of invention. Not in Nigeria; here necessity is an excuse or reason for escape, or the indefinite postponement of needed action until doomsday. Then we reach out for the doctrine of necessity which negates the prevailing law of the land. When late President Umar Yar’ Adua was sick and left for a hospital in Saudi Arabia without handing over the affairs of state to his Vice President, didn’t he violate a law? When he was too sick and could not shoulder the affairs of State, shouldn’t he have resigned? And since he couldn’t or didn’t do so, should he not have been impeached by the National Assembly according to the law?
A cabal whose selfish interest was openly demonstrated was allowed to hold the country to ransom for six long months only for us to fall on the lap of the gods of necessity to move on, despising the constitution. We could concede to an individual the luxury of infringing our laws in order to preserve his own honor, but could not summon the courage to invent changes by reason of our peculiar challenges. Invention is the child of necessity just as necessity is the mother of invention.
The issues at dispute which caused the Nigerian civil war remain largely unresolved, 40 years after the war. If it was a necessity to keep Nigeria one, where is the invention to resolve the issues at dispute? In 1979, there was a disputed election which none of the contestants won decisively accordingly to the electoral law. Yet the powers that be decided the case via a judicial ruling of the Supreme Court which cannot be sited as precedence today. Could we not have rejected that verdict and insisted on the right thing, even if we have to pay the price? The authors of the 122/3 mathematical fraud of 1979 remained in the saddle up till now, to our shame as a people.
In 1993, another general election was held. There was little or no complain of the process except that when the result became apparent – reflecting the wishes of the electorate – the entire election was annulled by the same government which supervised it. In its place, a ramshackle interim government of selected people was put in place. Shouldn’t we have insisted on having our elected representatives instead of a ragtag gang? Yet we moved on, oblivious of the injury inflicted on us all. The same man who annulled that election which he himself supervised now wants to rule us again through an election – what an irony!
When in 1999, the military was conducting a general elections, no one knew the contents of the constitution or the laws by which the country will be administered. Yet, those who wanted to succeed them blindly jumped into the fray without asking questions and today, we are entangled with a constitution most unsuitable for our needs, which amendments by the National Assembly will worsen the value or its usefulness. If we had insisted on having a constitution made by ourselves for ourselves and approved through a referendum, we would have been better off than we are today. But the necessity to get the military out of government and the ambition of some politicians to take over power made us to accept a constitution unknown to us, thereby missing the opportunity.
Rather than adhering to the constitution which granted every one the right to run for any elective office, a doctrine of convenience called power-rotation or zoning is now set to tear us apart again. Rotation or zoning is a sister of the doctrine of necessity, putting the law aside as if it is of no effect. The sum total of this could be summarized thus: Nigerians seems to want to remain united as one country but lacked the courage to embark on a restructuring befitting a multi-ethnic and plural entity which we are. Perhaps we need be reminded of another legal maxim, nuptias non concubitus sed consensus fait, meaning – it is consent, not cohabitation, which makes a marriage. A man and a woman may live under the same roof, sleeping on the same bed, known by others to be husband and wife and yet, are the worst of enemies. Is separation or divorce not a better option if agreement is impossible?
Before you accuse me of treasonable felony, ask yourself why your country is regressing rather than progressing. Ask yourself why smaller countries like Botswana, Ghana and South Africa are now more respected than Nigeria. One more question; ask yourself why we could not conduct an acceptable election since 1960. Is it not for the same reason or factor why we have not evolved to be a nation in the true sense of the world? And why your ethnic nationality provides more sense of belonging than Nigeria? After all, you don’t have to be told that domus sua cuique est tutissimus refugium, i.e. to every one his house is his surest refuge.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
OVERVIEW OF PRESIDENTIAL ASPIRANTS
OVERVIEW OF PRESIDENTIAL ASPIRANTS
By Sam Onimisi
In the last four weeks or so, attempts have been made to showcase the known presidential aspirants struggling to emerge as their Party’s Candidates in the 2011 general election. Each aspirant has been examined, using the index of their past and the public’s perception of their persons. Attempts were also made to evaluate their suitability for and chances of clinching the presidency, come 2011. It has to be admitted that our assessment may not be perfect just as our opinion is not sacrosanct. We hope also that we have not sounded sanctimonious, even if we owe no apology for our own opinion.
The benefit for the people and the country is the recount or portrayal of the characters of the aspirants as this enhances the making of choice by readers and the electorate. Unless more aspirants emerge, the known ones as at now are mostly retired military or Para-military officers. These are gritty individuals whose training, orientation and presumptions are very useful in situation of emergencies, natural disasters and rescue missions. In this instance, it is assumed they are under Civil Authority which itself is subject to the consent of the generality of the people. But if the aspirants assumes near absolute authority, our collective experience as a people suggests that they may not be ideal for a democratic dispensation. One of their genres, General Olusegun Obasanjo came, saw and conquered Nigeria, leaving the people helplessly prostrate and despoiled. Can we afford another one so soon even when we have not yet overcome the debility of OBJ’s capricious rule?
Obasanjo’s administration has injected so much impunity, arbitrariness and corruption into Nigeria’s democratic practice such that the country cannot survive his type now, especially coming from a region who believed they were targeted for humiliation. The potential for revenge and more offences is very high. Aside from vengeance, the persons of the aspirants have intimidating antecedents, whose ego and personality may have been bruised, ignored or neglected. As former heads of state and Vice – President or security chief, their hubris were on edge for the period of Obasanjo’s rule. In any political contest involving such personalities, the clash of hubris and ambition often doubles the heat on the polity.
Cognizance must be taken of the ethnic group of the aspirants, although some people may want this aspect ignored. Because we have always swept the ethnic factor of our challenges under the carpet to our regret, we must learn to engage the problem it poses if we must over come it. Four of the five known aspirants are either Hausa-Fulani or Fulani, three from the North-West and one, the North East. The four are Muslims. While the chances of their unity may be said to be bright, giving their common ethnic, regional and religious origin, their individual pride, ambition and rivalry may obviate any co-operation between them. On the other hand, their co-operation or unity if based on sectional, religious and regional interests portends danger for the rest of the country.
We need not misunderstand this viewpoint. A situation where four outstanding aspirants with the same worldview and values are determined to wrestle power from another aspirant in a manner suggestive of preserving their region’s patrimony could be combustive and highly volatile. To diffuse the inflammable contents of this mindset, what gave cause to that belief must be confronted. No one who lives in this country is a stranger to the concept (I am not too sure if it qualifies to be a concept) that the commonwealth of Nigeria is shared along regional divide, vis-à-vis; economic and technological power to the South and political power to the North. Because this belief is prevalent and no effort has been made to disabuse it, who do we blame if a section of the country regards power as its birthright?
The concern of this overview is the means and methods which may be employed to achieve the goal. In democracy, dialogue, negotiation and compromise are tools to resolve knotty issues such as power rotation; not just within a Party but between parties, regions and religions. Attainment of power in a multi-ethnic and plural society is more prone to violence if approached with the mindset of fighting for one’s inheritance. The acceptable method in a democracy is through a contest that is seen to be free and fair. But selfish ambition and sectional interests does not lend themselves too much rationality. There lies the danger.
The resort to force and violence in expressing ones preference is common in Nigeria. We have spilled so much blood in the choice of religions, in the accident of ethnic origin or birth and in the geopolitical area in which we were born. How do we prevent the resort to or the employment of force in the current quest for power as it relates to 2011? And if a section succeeds in attaining or retaining power by force of violence, how does that help the unity of Nigeria?
Rather than preaching against violence (as we all know the consequences) we can only warn that violence begets violence and whoever may wish to employ it must remember this fact. Since we refuse to devolve power as superior to its rotation, and because we failed to apply our revenue to economic development of our country, we are left with no better choice than to cling to the puerile view that economic and political rights are mutually exclusive.
We need prayers to avoid violence in the next general election. We need more than prayers if we must live in peace with ourselves. We must learn to do what must be done to recognize, respect and understand our differences as a multi-ethnic polity. Until we do so, every general election or transition from one government to another is a potential occasion for the disintegration of what appear to be a pack of cards we put together as a house, called Nigeria. May the will of God be done!
By Sam Onimisi
In the last four weeks or so, attempts have been made to showcase the known presidential aspirants struggling to emerge as their Party’s Candidates in the 2011 general election. Each aspirant has been examined, using the index of their past and the public’s perception of their persons. Attempts were also made to evaluate their suitability for and chances of clinching the presidency, come 2011. It has to be admitted that our assessment may not be perfect just as our opinion is not sacrosanct. We hope also that we have not sounded sanctimonious, even if we owe no apology for our own opinion.
The benefit for the people and the country is the recount or portrayal of the characters of the aspirants as this enhances the making of choice by readers and the electorate. Unless more aspirants emerge, the known ones as at now are mostly retired military or Para-military officers. These are gritty individuals whose training, orientation and presumptions are very useful in situation of emergencies, natural disasters and rescue missions. In this instance, it is assumed they are under Civil Authority which itself is subject to the consent of the generality of the people. But if the aspirants assumes near absolute authority, our collective experience as a people suggests that they may not be ideal for a democratic dispensation. One of their genres, General Olusegun Obasanjo came, saw and conquered Nigeria, leaving the people helplessly prostrate and despoiled. Can we afford another one so soon even when we have not yet overcome the debility of OBJ’s capricious rule?
Obasanjo’s administration has injected so much impunity, arbitrariness and corruption into Nigeria’s democratic practice such that the country cannot survive his type now, especially coming from a region who believed they were targeted for humiliation. The potential for revenge and more offences is very high. Aside from vengeance, the persons of the aspirants have intimidating antecedents, whose ego and personality may have been bruised, ignored or neglected. As former heads of state and Vice – President or security chief, their hubris were on edge for the period of Obasanjo’s rule. In any political contest involving such personalities, the clash of hubris and ambition often doubles the heat on the polity.
Cognizance must be taken of the ethnic group of the aspirants, although some people may want this aspect ignored. Because we have always swept the ethnic factor of our challenges under the carpet to our regret, we must learn to engage the problem it poses if we must over come it. Four of the five known aspirants are either Hausa-Fulani or Fulani, three from the North-West and one, the North East. The four are Muslims. While the chances of their unity may be said to be bright, giving their common ethnic, regional and religious origin, their individual pride, ambition and rivalry may obviate any co-operation between them. On the other hand, their co-operation or unity if based on sectional, religious and regional interests portends danger for the rest of the country.
We need not misunderstand this viewpoint. A situation where four outstanding aspirants with the same worldview and values are determined to wrestle power from another aspirant in a manner suggestive of preserving their region’s patrimony could be combustive and highly volatile. To diffuse the inflammable contents of this mindset, what gave cause to that belief must be confronted. No one who lives in this country is a stranger to the concept (I am not too sure if it qualifies to be a concept) that the commonwealth of Nigeria is shared along regional divide, vis-à-vis; economic and technological power to the South and political power to the North. Because this belief is prevalent and no effort has been made to disabuse it, who do we blame if a section of the country regards power as its birthright?
The concern of this overview is the means and methods which may be employed to achieve the goal. In democracy, dialogue, negotiation and compromise are tools to resolve knotty issues such as power rotation; not just within a Party but between parties, regions and religions. Attainment of power in a multi-ethnic and plural society is more prone to violence if approached with the mindset of fighting for one’s inheritance. The acceptable method in a democracy is through a contest that is seen to be free and fair. But selfish ambition and sectional interests does not lend themselves too much rationality. There lies the danger.
The resort to force and violence in expressing ones preference is common in Nigeria. We have spilled so much blood in the choice of religions, in the accident of ethnic origin or birth and in the geopolitical area in which we were born. How do we prevent the resort to or the employment of force in the current quest for power as it relates to 2011? And if a section succeeds in attaining or retaining power by force of violence, how does that help the unity of Nigeria?
Rather than preaching against violence (as we all know the consequences) we can only warn that violence begets violence and whoever may wish to employ it must remember this fact. Since we refuse to devolve power as superior to its rotation, and because we failed to apply our revenue to economic development of our country, we are left with no better choice than to cling to the puerile view that economic and political rights are mutually exclusive.
We need prayers to avoid violence in the next general election. We need more than prayers if we must live in peace with ourselves. We must learn to do what must be done to recognize, respect and understand our differences as a multi-ethnic polity. Until we do so, every general election or transition from one government to another is a potential occasion for the disintegration of what appear to be a pack of cards we put together as a house, called Nigeria. May the will of God be done!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
